Re: [Marxism] John Holloway-Alex Callinicos debate

["Calvin Broadbent" <calvinbroadbent@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

Well, I think the Soviet state certainly became the "agency to administer
the impulse to capitalist restoration". I don't think Stalin was entirely
behind that though. What I certainly disagree with was Shane's saying that
Stalin was never anything more than a 'parasite' on the October revolution
in which he played 'no role'. In fact, Stalin was an active and valued (by
Lenin and many others) revolutionary from early on. He was not 'produced' by
a parasitic bureaucracy, as Shane suggests.

That's all.



RRUBINELLI WROTE:

> Your welcome...er..  kind of, because I don't think Shane Mage is wrong at
> all
> about Stalin and the conversion of the soviet state from the machinery to
> defend the revolution into the agency to administer the impulse to
> capitalist restoration.


SHANE MAGES WROTE:

> Whether or not Djugashvili-Stalin was originally the "product" of the
> Okhrana or merely of an Orthodox Seminary, he can in no way  be
> legitimately  called a product of the October Revolution, in which he
> played no role except that of a harmful parasite.  Vozhd-Stalin was the
> product of the parasitic bureaucracy that infected and ultimately killed
> the workers' state created in the October Revolution.

_________________________________________________________________
Be the first to hear what's new at MSN - sign up to our free newsletters!
http://www.msn.co.uk/newsletters


________________________________________________
YOU MUST clip all extraneous text before replying to a message.
Send list submissions to: Marxism@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Set your options at: http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/marxism